POLISCOPE
Back to feed

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.

Hearing on International Shipping Costs and Postal Competition

Original title: FAIR COMPETITION IN INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING

Record date · January 1, 2015

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Does

This House subcommittee hearing examined why it is often cheaper to ship small packages from China to the U.S. than to ship the same items domestically. The committee investigated the financial impact of these international shipping rates on the U.S. Postal Service.

Why it matters

The U.S. Postal Service reported a $75 million loss on in the previous year, raising questions about the sustainability of current international shipping agreements and their effect on domestic shipping costs.

Who It Affects

Groups the bill's text affects, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

U.S. Postal Service

The agency manages international mail delivery and reported financial losses associated with inbound international shipping rates.

Directly affected

FedEx Express

As a private shipping competitor, the company provides regulatory perspective on international shipping competition.

Directly affected

Amazon.com

As a major e-commerce retailer, the company provides input on global public policy regarding shipping.

Key Facts

  • The U.S. Postal Service reported a $75 million loss on inbound international mail in the year prior to the hearing.
  • The hearing was held on June 16, 2015, by the Subcommittee on Government Operations.
  • Committee staff identified instances where small goods from China, such as stylus pens and lipstick, were shipped to the U.S. at prices significantly lower than domestic shipping rates.
  • The hearing included testimony from officials representing the Postal Regulatory Commission, the State Department, the U.S. Postal Service, FedEx, and Amazon.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is it cheaper to ship from China than within the U.S.?
The hearing investigated this discrepancy, noting that current international shipping agreements and rate structures allow for lower costs on certain compared to domestic rates.
How much money did the Postal Service lose on international mail?
The U.S. Postal Service reported a loss of approximately $75 million on in the year preceding the hearing.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

International Shipping Cost Disparity

The hearing highlights a structural issue where international shipping agreements create financial losses for the U.S. Postal Service compared to domestic shipping.

Connected Entities

Mark Meadows, U.S. Postal Service, Randy S. Miskanic and 5 more
PersonMark Meadows“Chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations”Map →
OrganizationU.S. Postal Service“Subject of the hearing regarding international mail losses”Map →
PersonRandy S. Miskanic“Acting CIO and EVP, U.S. Postal Service”Map →
PersonDavid C. Williams“Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service”Map →
PersonRobert G. Taub“Acting Chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission”Map →
PersonRobert J. Faucher“Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, U.S. State Department”Map →
PersonNancy Sparks“Managing Director, Regulatory Affairs, FedEx Express”Map →
PersonPaul Misener“Vice President, Global Public Policy, Amazon.com”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance65
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy40
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment20
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record